While the Biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see the biographies of living persons noticeboard.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
I am going to edit the page to reflect the fact that President Johnson opposed the bill, as confirmed by George Washington University's National Security Archive.0nullbinary0 (talk) 02:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
The second sentence in the background section previously read, "However, the sensitivity of some government information and private interests clashes with this view." I feel this sentence was inelegant and confusing and I attempted to replace it with something more straightforward. I'm not a specialist in the subject, so I was careful not to change the meaning of the sentence. However, if I did so inadvertently, please improve it instead of reverting it. I also know that the sentence is still not ideal as it refers to 'others', but I felt this was allowable as the previous sentence made reference to 'some'. Perhaps there is a way to rewrite both sentences that makes clear the conflict without referring to nameless parties. Bendykst (talk) 02:24, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Further, the first sentence of the third paragraph currently reads "However, it is in the exemptions to solicitation of information under these acts that problems and discrepancies arise". It is a very unwieldy sentence to read and process. I suggest changes, but am not familiar.220.127.116.11 (talk) 22:05, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Update of "FOIA amendments and related executive orders" Section
This section includes the sentence "Congress is likely to readdress the issue after the 2010 elections." Was this ever done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 22:55, 7 September 2011 (UTC)